ZNS COMMANDANT OWNING A COMPANY-ITS WRONG
Dickson Jere wrote;
Since I started this issue, PACRA has responded and I shall also respond thus:
1. PACRA is not legal advisor to government. PACRA is merely a Registry where we file company documents. Only Attorney General can give legal advise to state institutions. So, PACRA should leave legal issues to Attorney General chambers.
2. PACRA agrees with me that the logical thing to do is to allow the Minister of Finance to hold shares on behalf of the Zambian people in these companies. That is the correct position and there is no need to sugar-coat the wrong!
3. I disagree with PACRA that the individuals holding shares in State institutions can sign Shareholder Agreements on how to give back the shares when they leave office. That is wrong! Shareholder Agreements are secret documents that do not get filed at PACRA for purposes of scrutiny by the public. Shareholder Agreements are not even part of the Incorporation documents at PACRA. Why then refer them to secret documents? Transparency is important!
4. IDC, which is chaired by the President and Commander In-Chief, is owned by the Minister of Finance (Incorporation) Act. Why is it a problem to allow the same arrangement with ZNS? This is same government and same treasury…am I missing something?
5. Both the ZNS Commandant and his deputy have been given 7,500 shares each of the total 15,000 issued shares in Eagles Holdings Limited. Why so? And the company secretary is the deputy Commandant. Why didn’t they appoint a legal counsel at ZNS to be Secretary since it is legal work?
6. PACRA should stick to keeping company documents and not involve itself in legal issues which is the province of the Attorney General and Solicitor-General as per Constitution of Zambia. ZNS is not legal personality and therefore is represented by Attorney General.
Kwasila
Mr Jere, I remember listening to the ZNS Commandant Solochi saying that he is not the only one or first ZNS Commandant to own shares but even the former or some of his predecessors have also owned shares.
Is this true or not, if it is true why are you not also writing on them, or is it the same tribalism and regionalism that is being spear headed in a different style or not? But if there had been none then the issue of you sticking, to continue issuing these issues on him by your planned plans as part of the extended UKWA and UMODZI KIMAWA Iis on the head